Skom has already done something similar, but it didn't help. I explained myself, then he paraphrases that explanation incorrectly, continues to make unsupported claims, casts more aspersions, and we're back to where we started. There's not much reason to expect that to improve.Why not say, "This seems to be inconsistent with what I have understood to be your position. Would you please clarify?"
It's so easy, even a... nevermind.
I've told him how to handle the matter: Get my exact words and the link to them, and let's look at those words together. He disregards that, paraphrases again, and yadda yadda.
What turned me against him was his unwillingness to cooperate - more faulty and unsupported paraphrasing - combined with personal slurs. I can't see how to interpret that more charitably than I have - he's a dimwit.You seem to be operating on a fallacy called the false dichotomy. He didn't say your paraphrasing was the opposite of what he said. The unnecessary addition of "(but would require proof)" is probably what frustrated him.
The only remaining issue is whether he should be told. I can't see why not. Why shelter him from corrective social pressure? It's instructive unless he refuses to benefit from it - that is, refuses to consider his choices.